Wilson: DeMint’s Citizen Leadership on Term Limits

jim demint term limits

By William Wilson

If the year of the “Tea Party” and the summer of the “Town Hall” are to bring lasting change to the American political system, then the elected representatives of both parties need to heed the fundamental message that was sent.

That message? “Enough is enough.”

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Washington politicians are refusing to listen – which is nothing new, sadly. This is just one of many reasons why U.S. Sen. Jim DeMint (one of the few elected leaders who is listening to the voice of the people) couldn’t have picked a better time to seize upon the necessity and importance of term limits for the U.S. Congress.

Fifteen years ago, Republicans were swept into power pledging to bring fundamental change to Washington – including term limits. Of course, along with most of the promises contained in the “Contract with America,” term limits were abandoned very soon after the election.

Does that sound familiar? It should.

This year, we’re seeing a whole new batch of un-kept political promises from President Barack Obama – like a “middle class tax cut” that has been drowned beneath a rising tide of bureaucratic red ink. For all his inspiring talk of “changing Washington,” Obama has shown absolutely no interest whatsoever when it comes to taking on Washington’s entrenched network of special interests and career politicians.

And more than anything else, this entrenched network is the problem.

In fact, if the American political experience has taught us anything over the past two decades, it’s that we don’t need any more politicians promising us change – we need to change the politicians. And change them regularly, as Senator DeMint has proposed.

After all, each year the ruling class in America gets a little bit further out of touch with the people they claim to represent. For example, look no further than the visceral reaction of many elected officials to the recent public outpouring of support for limited government principles. Not only do we have another epidemic of tone deafness in our nation’s capital, but many of the lobbyist-led, special interest-fed “leaders” in Congress have adopted a strategy of denigrating their constituents – branding them as “brown shirts” or using other pejorative terms to paint them (and their limited government beliefs) as un-American.

More importantly, the wishes of the “not-so-Silent Majority” are nowhere to be found as several decidedly un-American bills sail through the halls of the U.S. Congress. For example, after the August recess, lawmakers briefly killed a so-called “public option” to President Barack Obama’s health care bill – only to bring this anti-free market provision back to life once the bill had cleared a critical Senate Committee vote.

Also, many politicians – including U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham – are now cozying up to supporters of a “Cap and Trade” tax hike that even Obama’s own Treasury Department admits will result in a huge annual increase in the average American family’s energy bill. On top of all this, soaring deficits and a skyrocketing national debt are saddling current and future generations of Americans with a tab they’ll never be able to repay.

Our right to protest these grievances is also coming under attack, as the Federal Communication Commission is now home to several Obama appointees who have publicly advocated in favor of the suppression of free speech on talk radio and the Internet.

Clearly, we’ve got to take these generic notions of “change” a step further if we are to set this nation’s steps back on a path to prosperity and personal freedom.

In consistently standing up for free markets and individual liberty – and against bailouts, socialized medicine and censorship – Jim DeMint has earned a reputation as one of the few principled, fiscally-responsible lawmakers in Washington. But Senator DeMint knows that these principled stands will only take good government so far – there also must be a mechanism in place that prevents politicians from becoming part of Washington’s self-serving ruling class.

By proposing that House members limit themselves to three terms (6 years) and Senators to two terms (12 years), DeMint is creating this mechanism – and taking the fight directly to an age-old system of political spoils that continues to resist both parties’ promises of “change.”

Term limits exist already for the President, most governors and fifteen state legislatures. It’s time we bring them to the U.S. Congress, and in so doing strike a blow for “change that taxpayers can believe in.”

William Wilson is president of Americans for Limited Government.  For the original version of this article, click here.  For more ALG news and opinion articles, click here.

Follow FITSNews on Twitter and like us on Facebook

Tags: , ,

Comments

  1. By henry November 13, 2009 at 11:36 am

    The career politicians will bury this one.

    I remember Bob Inglis making and breaking his term limits pledge.

    Reply

  2. By vicupstate November 13, 2009 at 12:38 pm

    Actually Henry, Inglis did no such thing.

    He retired from the House after his self-imposesd term limit and ‘lived under the laws he passed’ for an equal amout of time before runnin gfor re-election.

    Reply

  3. By henry November 13, 2009 at 1:24 pm

    Odd– I recall that he was going to limit himself to just two terms as a congressman.

    Reply

  4. By Georgia Bulldozer November 13, 2009 at 2:04 pm

    vicupstate,

    I’m glad Inglis was able to live “under the laws he passed” just like the rest of us…but he also broke his pledge. Otherwise, he wouldn’t be back in Congress.

    Reply

  5. By Ray Banduchi November 13, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    We’uns kin start wiff ar kin th State House. Term limits, zatis!

    Reply

  6. By OnNoNotAgain November 13, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    Not quite right.
    He spent some time on the bench before running for the U.S. House again.
    But he ran against Fritz Hollings for that seat as his first stint was ending. He was trying to re-up with a promotion.
    Six years in the house, followed by three terms in the Senate would put him in just his second term of the Senate now. He’d have kept his term limits pledge into 24 years in Congress.
    Bob is a bit goofy. He was the most rabid conservative I ever saw in that first tenure, but he’s been making some true-blood conservatives/Repubs kind of mad.

    Reply

  7. By Fred Simmons November 13, 2009 at 4:00 pm

    Yeah, his nickname these days really should be Beltway Bob. That’s why I’m voting for Gowdy.

    Reply

  8. By Gillon November 13, 2009 at 4:21 pm

    This sounds like the old Karl Rove strategy to me: Be for an issue that has no possible chance to be implemented, but that has support among certain segments of the electorate. You take no risk, knowing that the issue will never pass, but you ingratiate yourself to that interest group. If Mr. DeMint truly believes in a two-term limit for Senators, he should simply announce now that he will step down after serving two terms.

    Reply

  9. By RedBank Bar November 13, 2009 at 4:30 pm

    The fundamental message is WING NUTS ARE US. Astroturf anger by the know nothing wings of the Repugnant Party. Or as Little Lindsey, puts it, the angry white guys.

    Reply

  10. By baked November 13, 2009 at 4:48 pm

    Can we make sure all ballots are printed with not only the party affiliation next to the candidates name, but also an “I” to denote incumbents for the next several elections?

    I think I’d vote for Joe Stalin if he was running against in incumbent in 2010, 2012 or 2014. They all need to go.

    Reply

  11. By scooter November 13, 2009 at 7:50 pm

    He knows good and well that this will not pass. He is only pandering to the folks who dislike government. His co-sponsors are all leaving at the end of their term, anyway. Wish he would step down. He is Not good for SC.

    Reply

  12. By stimulus guy November 16, 2009 at 9:15 am

    Demint is a douche

    Reply

  13. By Brandon November 16, 2009 at 11:43 am

    DeMint is dead nuts on it. Repeat after me…
    TERM LIMITS…TERM LIMITS…TERM LIMITS…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

*